Editing Infant mortality (section)

==Epidemiology==
{{See also|List of countries by infant mortality rate}}
{| class="wikitable" style="float:right; margin: 0.5em 0 0.5em 1em;"
|+ World historical and predicted infant mortality rates per 1,000 births (1950–2050) <br><small>UN, medium variant, 2008 rev.</small><ref>{{Cite web |title=UNdata: Infant mortality rate (per 1,000 births) |url=http://data.un.org/Data.aspx?d=PopDiv&f=variableID%3A77}}</ref>
|-
!Years!!Rate!!Years!!Rate
|-
|1950–1955|| style="text-align:center;" |152||2000–2005|| style="text-align:center;" |52
|-
||1955–1960|| style="text-align:center;" |136||2005–2010|| style="text-align:center;" |47
|-
||1960–1965|| style="text-align:center;" |116||2010–2015|| style="text-align:center;" |43
|-
||1965–1970|| style="text-align:center;" |100||2015–2020|| style="text-align:center;" |40
|-
||1970–1975|| style="text-align:center;" |91||2020–2025|| style="text-align:center;" |37
|-
||1975–1980|| style="text-align:center;" |83||2025–2030|| style="text-align:center;" |34
|-
||1980–1985|| style="text-align:center;" |74||2030–2035|| style="text-align:center;" |31
|-
||1985–1990|| style="text-align:center;" |65||2035–2040|| style="text-align:center;" |28
|-
||1990–1995|| style="text-align:center;" |61||2040–2045|| style="text-align:center;" |25
|-
||1995–2000|| style="text-align:center;" |57||2045–2050|| style="text-align:center;" |23
|}
Global IMR, as well as the IMR for both [[less developed countries]] (LDCs) and [[developed countries|more developed countries]] (MDCs), declined significantly between 1960 and 2001. According to the [[Save the Children State of the World's Mothers report|State of the World's Mothers report]] by [[Save the Children]], the world IMR declined from 126 in 1960 to 57 in 2001.<ref>{{Cite web |date=2019-01-14 |title=UNICEF, State of the World's Children 2003 infant mortality table |url=http://www.unicef.org/sowc03/tables/table1.html |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20190114153240/https://www.unicef.org/sowc03/tables/table1.html |archive-date=2019-01-14 |access-date=2013-09-29 |website=Unicef.org}}</ref> The global neonatal mortality rate, NMR, decreased from 36.6 in 1990 to 18.0 in 2017.<ref>{{Cite journal |vauthors=Hug L, Alexander M, You D, Alkema L |date=June 2019 |title=National, regional, and global levels and trends in neonatal mortality between 1990 and 2017, with scenario-based projections to 2030: a systematic analysis |journal=The Lancet. Global Health |volume=7 |issue=6 |pages=e710–e720 |doi=10.1016/s2214-109x(19)30163-9 |pmc=6527519 |pmid=31097275}}</ref>

However, IMR was, and remains, higher in LDCs. In 2001, the IMR for 91 LDCs was about 10 times as large as it was for 8 MDCs. On average, for LDCs, the IMR is 17 times higher than that of MDCs.{{Clarify|reason=Was it 10 times as large or 17 times higher?|date=July 2023}} Also, while both LDCs and MDCs made significant reductions in IMR, the reduction rate has been lower in less developed countries than among the more developed countries. Among many low- and middle-income countries, there is also substantial variation in infant mortality rate at a subnational level.<ref>{{Cite journal |vauthors=Burstein R, Henry NJ, Collison ML, Marczak LB, Sligar A, Watson S, etal |date=October 2019 |title=Mapping 123 million neonatal, infant and child deaths between 2000 and 2017 |journal=Nature |volume=574 |issue=7778 |pages=353–358 |bibcode=2019Natur.574..353B |doi=10.1038/s41586-019-1545-0 |pmc=6800389 |pmid=31619795}}</ref>

As the lowest rate, in Monaco, is 1.80, and the highest IMR, in Afghanistan, is 121.63, a factor of about 67 separates them.

{| class="wikitable"
|+  Top and bottom five countries by this measure (2013 estimates)<ref>{{Cite web |title=Infant Mortality Rate |url=https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/fields/2091.html |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20121119041333/https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/fields/2091.html |archive-date=November 19, 2012 |access-date=December 18, 2012 |website=CIA – The World Factbook}}</ref>
|-
! Rank || Country || Infant mortality rate <br> (deaths/1,000 live births)
|-
| 1 || [[Afghanistan]] || 121.63
|-
| 2 || [[Niger]] || 109.98
|-
| 3 || [[Mali]] || 109.08
|-
| 4 || [[Somalia]] || 103.72
|-
| 5 || [[Central African Republic]] || 97.17
|-
| 218 || [[Sweden]] || 2.74
|-
| 219 || [[Singapore]] || 2.65
|-
| 220 || [[Bermuda]] || 2.47
|-
| 221 || [[Japan]] || 2.21
|-
| 222 || [[Monaco]] || 1.80
|}

===United Kingdom===
A study published in the [[British Medical Journal]] in 2019 found that the rate of infant mortality in England had increased with an additional 24 infant deaths per 100,000 live births per year. There was no significant change from the pre-existing trend in the most affluent areas, thus the rise disproportionately affected the poorest areas of the country, and was attributed largely to rising [[child poverty]], as a result of sustained reductions in the welfare benefits available to families with children.<ref>{{Cite news |date=4 October 2019 |title='Unprecedented' rise in infant mortality in England linked to poverty |publisher=The Journal.ie |url=https://www.thejournal.ie/infant-mortality-poverty-england-4835780-Oct2019/ |access-date=1 December 2019}}</ref>

===United States===

[[File:NewsPaperArticleChildMortality-TheWorld-SaturdayEvening-1906-07-14.jpg|thumb|1906 headline imploring parents to attend to the cleanliness of their infants, and to expose them to the "clean air" outdoors]]
Of the 27 most developed countries, the U.S. has the highest infant mortality rate, despite spending more on health care, per capita, than any other country.<ref>{{Cite web |title=Health resources - Health spending - OECD Data |url=http://data.oecd.org/healthres/health-spending.htm |access-date=2019-12-18 |website=OECD |language=en}}</ref> Significant racial and socio-economic differences in the United States affect the IMR, in contrast with other developed countries with more homogeneous populations. In particular, IMR varies greatly by race in the US. The average IMR for the country as a whole is therefore not a fair representation of the wide variations that exist between segments of the population.<ref>{{Cite news |date=September 29, 2014 |title=Our infant mortality rate is a national embarrassment |newspaper=[[The Washington Post]] |url=https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2014/09/29/our-infant-mortality-rate-is-a-national-embarrassment/ |vauthors=Ingraham C}}</ref> Many theories have been explored as to why these racial differences exist, with socio economic factors usually coming out as a reasonable explanation. However, more studies have been conducted around this matter, and the largest advancement is around the idea of stress and how it affects pregnancy.{{citation needed|date=July 2023}}

In the 1850s, the infant mortality rate in the United States was estimated at 216.8 per 1,000 white babies  and 340.0 per 1,000 African American babies,{{citation needed|date=July 2023}} but rates have significantly declined in modern times. This declining rate has been mainly due to modern improvements in basic health care and technology, as well as medical advances.<ref>{{Cite book |title=Economics: Principles in Action |vauthors=O'Sullivan A, Sheffrin SM |date=2003 |publisher=Pearson Prentice Hall |isbn=978-0-13-063085-8 |author-link=Arthur O'Sullivan (economist) |author-link2=Steven M. Sheffrin}}</ref> In the last century, the infant mortality rate has decreased by 93%.<ref name="MacDorman 2009" /> Overall, the rates per 1,000 births have decreased drastically from 20 deaths in 1970 to 6.9 deaths in 2003. In 2003, the leading causes of infant mortality in the United States were congenital anomalies, disorders related to immaturity, AIDS, and maternal complications.{{citation needed|date=July 2023}} [[Smoking during pregnancy]] declined to 10.2% with 12.4% of these births being [[low birth weight]]s, compared with 7.7% of births being low birth weights for non-smokers. Overall, babies born with low birth weight increased to 8.1% between 2003 and 2004.<ref>{{Cite web |date=Jan 13, 2006 |title=Preventing Infant Mortality |url=https://www.hhs.gov/news/factsheet/infant.html |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20120418035538/http://www.hhs.gov/news/factsheet/infant.html |archive-date=2012-04-18 |website=U.S. Department of Health & Human Services}}</ref> According to the ''New York Times'', "the main reason for the high rate is preterm delivery, and there was a 10% increase in such births from 2000 to 2006." Between 2007 and 2011, however, the preterm birth rate has decreased every year. In 2011, 11.73% of babies were born before the 37th week of gestation, down from a high of 12.80% in 2006.<ref>{{Cite journal |vauthors=Martin JA, Hamilton BE, Ventura SJ, Osterman MJ, Mathews TJ |date=June 2013 |title=Births: final data for 2011 |url=https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/nvsr/nvsr62/nvsr62_01.pdf |journal=National Vital Statistics Reports |volume=62 |issue=1 |pages=1–69, 72 |pmid=24974591}}</ref>

Economic expenditures on [[labor and delivery]] and neonatal care are relatively high in the United States. A conventional birth averages US$9,775 with a C-section costing US$15,041.<ref>{{Cite web |date=June 30, 2013 |title=American Way of Birth, Costliest in the World |url=https://www.nytimes.com/2013/07/01/health/american-way-of-birth-costliest-in-the-world.html |website=The New York Times |vauthors=Rosenthal E}}</ref>{{Failed verification|date=July 2023}} Preterm births in the US have been estimated to cost $51,600 per child, with a total yearly cost of $26.2 billion.<ref>{{Cite book |title=Preterm Birth: Causes, Consequences, and Prevention |date=2007 |publisher=National Academies Press (US) |veditors=Behrman RE, Butler AS |location=Washington (DC) |chapter=Chapter 12: Societal Costs of Preterm Birth |chapter-url=https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK11358/ |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20230606231804/https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK11358/ |archive-date=2023-06-06}}</ref> Despite this spending, several reports state that infant mortality rate in the United States is significantly higher than in other developed nations.<ref name="Osel2008" /><ref>{{Cite journal |display-authors=6 |vauthors=Oestergaard MZ, Inoue M, Yoshida S, Mahanani WR, Gore FM, Cousens S, Lawn JE, Mathers CD |date=August 2011 |title=Neonatal mortality levels for 193 countries in 2009 with trends since 1990: a systematic analysis of progress, projections, and priorities |journal=PLOS Medicine |volume=8 |issue=8 |pages=e1001080 |doi=10.1371/journal.pmed.1001080 |pmc=3168874 |pmid=21918640 |doi-access=free }}</ref><ref>{{Cite journal |vauthors=Starfield B |date=July 2000 |title=Is US health really the best in the world? |url=http://silver.neep.wisc.edu/~lakes/iatrogenic.pdf |journal=JAMA |volume=284 |issue=4 |pages=483–5 |doi=10.1001/jama.284.4.483 |pmid=10904513}}</ref> Estimates vary; the CIA's ''[[The World Factbook|World Factbook]]'' ranks the US 55th internationally in 2014, with a rate of 6.17, while the UN figures from 2005 to 2010 place the US 34th.{{Full citation needed|date=July 2023}}

Differences in measurement could play a substantial role in the disparity between the US and other nations. A [[Fetal viability|non-viable birth]] in the US could be registered as a [[stillbirth]] in similarly developed nations like Japan, Sweden, Norway, Ireland, the Netherlands, and France, thereby reducing their IMR.<ref name="pmid21058532" /> [[Neonatal intensive care unit|Neonatal intensive care]] is also more likely to be applied in the US to marginally viable infants, although such interventions have been found to increase both costs and disability. A study following the implementation of the [[Born-Alive Infants Protection Act|Born Alive Infant Protection Act of 2002]] found universal resuscitation of infants born between 20 and 23 weeks increased the neonatal spending burden by $313.3 million while simultaneously decreasing [[quality-adjusted life year]]s by 329.3.<ref>{{Cite journal |vauthors=Partridge JC, Sendowski MD, Martinez AM, Caughey AB |date=January 2012 |title=Resuscitation of likely nonviable infants: a cost-utility analysis after the Born-Alive Infant Protection Act |journal=American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology |volume=206 |issue=1 |pages=49.e1–49.e10 |doi=10.1016/j.ajog.2011.09.026 |pmid=22051817}}</ref>

[[File:Infant Mortality Rates in the US by Race and Hispanic Ethinicity of the Mother.png|thumb|upright=1.3|Data indicating the IMR disparity between infants non-Hispanic black postpartum parent's and infants of white or Hispanic postpartum parents in the United States from 2000 to 2010<ref name="QuickStats" />]]
The vast majority of research conducted in the late twentieth and early twenty-first century indicates that African-American infants are more than twice as likely to die in their first year of life than white infants. Although a decline occurred from 13.63 deaths in 2005 to 11.46 deaths per 1,000 live births in 2010, non-Hispanic black parents continued to report a rate 2.2 times as high as that for non-Hispanic white parents.<ref name="QuickStats">{{Cite journal |date=January 10, 2014 |title=QuickStats: Infant Mortality Rates,* by Race and Hispanic Ethnicity of Mother — United States, 2000, 2005, and 2010 |url=https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/mm6301a9.htm |journal=Weekly |volume=63 |issue=1 |pages=25}}</ref>

Contemporary research findings have demonstrated that nationwide racial disparities in infant mortality are linked to the experiences of the postpartum parent and that these disparities cannot be totally accounted for by socio-economic, behavioral or genetic factors.<ref name="Osel2008" /> The [[Hispanic paradox]], an effect observed in other health indicators, appears in the infant mortality rate, as well. Hispanic postpartum parents see an IMR comparable to non-Hispanic white postpartum parents, even with lower educational attainment and economic status.<ref>{{Cite news |last=Chung |first=Juliet |date=29 Aug 2006 |title=Hispanic Paradox: Income may be lower but health better than most |work=The Seattle Times |url=http://seattletimes.com/html/nationworld/2003233307_hispanichealth29.html |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20131105041813/http://seattletimes.com/html/nationworld/2003233307_hispanichealth29.html |archive-date=2013-11-05}}</ref>  According to Mustillo's [[Coronary Artery Risk Development in Young Adults Study|CARDIA]] (Coronary Artery Risk Development in Young Adults) study, "self reported experiences of racial discrimination were associated with pre-term and low-birthweight deliveries, and such experiences may contribute to black-white disparities in prenatal outcomes."<ref>{{Cite journal |vauthors=Mustillo S, Krieger N, Gunderson EP, Sidney S, McCreath H, Kiefe CI |date=December 2004 |title=Self-reported experiences of racial discrimination and Black-White differences in preterm and low-birthweight deliveries: the CARDIA Study |journal=American Journal of Public Health |volume=94 |issue=12 |pages=2125–31 |doi=10.2105/AJPH.94.12.2125 |pmc=1448602 |pmid=15569964}}</ref> A study in North Carolina, for example, concluded that "white women who did not complete high school have a lower infant mortality rate than black college graduates."<ref>{{Cite journal |vauthors=Dole N, Savitz DA, Siega-Riz AM, Hertz-Picciotto I, McMahon MJ, Buekens P |date=August 2004 |title=Psychosocial factors and preterm birth among African American and White women in central North Carolina |journal=American Journal of Public Health |volume=94 |issue=8 |pages=1358–65 |doi=10.2105/AJPH.94.8.1358 |pmc=1448456 |pmid=15284044}}</ref> Likewise, dozens of population-based studies indicate that "the subjective, or perceived experience of racial discrimination is strongly associated with an increased risk of infant death and with poor health prospects for future generations of African Americans."<ref name="Osel2008" />

==== African American ====
{{Advert|section|date=May 2025}}
While earlier parts of this article have addressed racial differences in the infant death rate, a closer look into the effects of racial differences within the country is necessary to view discrepancies. Non-Hispanic Black women have the highest infant mortality rate with a rate of 11.3, while the IMR among white women is 5.1.<ref>{{Cite news |title=Infant Mortality Rate (Deaths per 1,000 Live Births) by Race/Ethnicity |publisher=Henry J. Kaiser Family Foundation |url=https://www.kff.org/other/state-indicator/infant-mortality-rate-by-race-ethnicity/?currentTimeframe=0&selectedDistributions=non-hispanic-white--non-hispanic-black--hispanic&sortModel=%7B%22colId%22:%22Location%22,%22sort%22:%22asc%22%7D |access-date=2017-03-07}}</ref>

While the popular argument is that due to the trend of black women being of a lower socio-economic status there is in an increased likelihood of a child suffering, and while this does correlate, the theory is not congruent with the data on Latino IMR in the United States. Latino people are almost as likely to experience poverty as blacks in the U.S., however, the infant mortality rate of Latinos is much closer to white women than it is to black women. The poverty rate for blacks is 24.1% and for Latinos it is 21.4%; if there is a direct correlation, then the IMR of these two groups should be rather similar, however, blacks have an IMR double that of Latinos.<ref>{{Cite web |title=U.S. Poverty Statistics |url=http://federalsafetynet.com/us-poverty-statistics.html |access-date=2017-03-07 |website=Federal Safety Net |archive-date=2017-03-08 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170308044424/http://federalsafetynet.com/us-poverty-statistics.html |url-status=dead }}</ref> Also, for black women who move out of poverty, or never experienced it in the first place, their IMR is not much lower than their counterparts experiencing higher levels of poverty.

Tyan Parker Dominguez at the University of Southern California offers a theory to explain the disproportionally high IMR among black women in the United States. She says African American women experience stress at much higher rates than any other group in the country. Stress produces particular hormones that can induce labor and contribute to other pregnancy problems. Considering [[premature birth]] is one of the leading causes of death of infants under the age of one, early labor is a legitimate concern. The idea of stress as a factor in IMR spans socio-economic status as Parker Dominguez says that for lower-class women stress comes from an unstable family life and chronic worry over poverty, while for middle-class women, battling racism, real or perceived, can be an extreme stressor.<ref name="southern-california-public-radio-2014" />

Others believe black women are predisposed to a higher IMR, meaning ancestrally speaking, all women from African descent should experience an elevated rate. This theory is quickly disproven by looking at foreign-born  African immigrants, these women come from a completely different social context and are not prone to the higher IMR experienced by American-born black women.<ref name="southern-california-public-radio-2014">{{Cite news |date=2014-03-03 |title=Why do black infants die so much more often than white infants? |work=Southern California Public Radio |url=http://www.scpr.org/news/2014/03/03/42483/why-do-black-infants-die-so-much-more-often-than-w/ |access-date=2017-03-16}}</ref>
Arline Geronimus, a professor at the University of Michigan School of Public Health calls the phenomenon "[[Weathering hypothesis|weathering]]". She claims constantly dealing with disadvantages and racial prejudice causes black women's birth outcomes to deteriorate with age. Therefore, younger black women may experience stress with pregnancy due to social and economic factors, but older women experience stress at a compounding rate and therefore have pregnancy complications aside from economic factors.<ref>{{Cite news |title=Why Black Women, Infants Lag In Birth Outcomes |work=National Public Radio |url=https://www.npr.org/2011/07/08/137652226/-the-race-gap |access-date=2017-03-07 |vauthors=Geronimus A}}</ref>

Mary O. Hearst, a professor in the Department of Public Health at Saint Catherine University, researched the effects of [[Racial segregation|segregation]] on the African American community to see if it contributed to the high IMR in black children.<ref>{{Cite journal |vauthors=Hearst MO, Oakes JM, Johnson PJ |date=December 2008 |title=The effect of racial residential segregation on black infant mortality |journal=American Journal of Epidemiology |volume=168 |issue=11 |pages=1247–54 |doi=10.1093/aje/kwn291 |pmid=18974059 |doi-access=free}}</ref> Hearst claims that residential segregation contributes to the high rates because of the political, economic, and health implications it poses on black mothers regardless of their socioeconomic status. Racism, economic disparities, and sexism in segregated communities are all examples of the daily stressors that pregnant black women face, and are risk factors for conditions that can affect their pregnancies such as [[pre-eclampsia]] and [[hypertension]].{{citation needed|date=July 2023}}

Studies have also shown that high IMR is due to the inadequate care that pregnant African Americans receive compared to other women in the country.<ref>{{Cite news |date=April 11, 2018 |title=Why America's Black Mothers and Babies Are in a Life-or-Death Crisis |work=The New York Times |url=https://www.nytimes.com/2018/04/11/magazine/black-mothers-babies-death-maternal-mortality.html |url-access=subscription |access-date=May 13, 2018 |vauthors=Villarosa L}}</ref> In another study, it was shown that Black patients were more likely to receive [[ibuprofen]] after surgery instead of [[oxycodone]].<ref>{{Cite journal |vauthors=Sabin JA, Greenwald AG |date=May 2012 |title=The influence of implicit bias on treatment recommendations for 4 common pediatric conditions: pain, urinary tract infection, attention deficit hyperactivity disorder, and asthma |journal=American Journal of Public Health |volume=102 |issue=5 |pages=988–995 |doi=10.2105/AJPH.2011.300621 |pmc=3483921 |pmid=22420817}}</ref> This unequal treatment stems from the idea that there are racial medical differences and is also rooted in racial biases and controlled images of black women. Because of this unequal treatment, research on maternal and prenatal care received by African American women and their infants,<ref name="Chalhoub">{{Cite book |url=https://www.americanprogress.org/issues/women/reports/2018/05/10/450577/health-care-system-racial-disparities-maternal-mortality/ |title=The Health Care System and Racial Disparities in Maternal Mortality |vauthors=Chalhoub T, Rimar K |date=2018 |publisher=Center for American Progress |location=Washington, DC |access-date=22 October 2020}}</ref> finds that black women do not receive the same urgency in medical care; they are also not taken as seriously regarding pain they feel or complications they think they are having, as exemplified by the complications tennis-star [[Serena Williams]] faced during her delivery.<ref>{{Cite news |date=January 11, 2018 |title=For Serena Williams, Childbirth Was a Harrowing Ordeal. She's Not Alone. |work=The New York Times |url=https://www.nytimes.com/2018/01/11/sports/tennis/serena-williams-baby-vogue.html |access-date=May 13, 2018 |vauthors=Salam M}}</ref>

Several peer-reviewed articles have documented a difference in the levels of care a black patient receives regardless of whether they have insurance. For white women IMR drops after age 20, and remains the same until she is in her 40s; for black women IMR does not decrease when accounting for higher education, nor change based on age, suggesting that there is a racial element.<ref>{{Cite web |title=Urban or rural, black lives in NC are being cut short almost before they begin. |url=https://www.newsobserver.com/news/politics-government/article239388203.html |access-date=11 April 2021 |website=newsobserver.com |vauthors=Bonnor L}}</ref> There is another element that must be considered: the effect of the intersection of race and gender. [[Misogynoir]] is a commonly cited and overlooked issue.<ref>{{Cite web |date=18 April 2019 |title=Racism and sexism against Black women may contribute to high rates of Black infant mortality |url=https://www.childtrends.org/blog/racism-sexism-against-black-women-may-contribute-high-rates-black-infant-mortality |website=Child Trends}}</ref> Black feminists have often been cited as the backbone of numerous Civil Rights events, but they feel overlooked when it comes to meaningful change that positively changes the lives of Black women specifically.<ref>{{Cite web |date=19 June 2020 |title=The Black Lives Matter movement does not exist without black women |url=https://commonwealthtimes.org/2020/06/19/the-black-lives-matter-movement-does-not-exist-without-black-women/ |website=The Commonwealth Times |vauthors=Shammet T}}</ref> During the June 2020 [[Black Lives Matter]] protests, many black feminists criticized the movement for excluding them.<ref>{{Cite web |date=5 August 2020 |title=Hidden in plain sight? Black female activists feel left out of BLM movement. {{!}} Milwaukee Neighborhood News Service |url=https://milwaukeenns.org/2020/08/05/hidden-in-plain-sight-black-female-activists-feel-left-out-of-blm-movement/ |website=milwaukeenns.org}}</ref> When examined through this lens, the increased rates of IMR of African American women becomes a matter of equity and an issue of social justice.

Strides have been made, however, to combat this epidemic. In Los Angeles County, health officials have partnered with non-profits around the city to help black women after the delivery of their child. One non-profit that has made a large impact on many lives is [[Great Beginnings For Black Babies]] in Inglewood. The non-profit centers around helping women deal with stress by forming support networks, keeping an open dialogue around race and family life, and also finding these women a secure place in the workforce.<ref>{{Cite web |title=Great Beginnings for Black Babies |url=http://www.gbbb-la.org/ |access-date=2017-03-07 |website=Great Beginnings for Black Babies}}</ref>

Some research argues that to end the high infant mortality rate of black children, the country needs to fix the social and societal issues that plague African Americans,<ref>{{Cite web |date=March 2018 |title=Fighting at Birth: Eradicating the Black-White Infant Mortality Gap |url=https://socialequity.duke.edu/sites/socialequity.duke.edu/files/site-images/EradicatingBlackInfantMortality-March2018%20FINAL.pdf |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20180925071653/https://socialequity.duke.edu/sites/socialequity.duke.edu/files/site-images/EradicatingBlackInfantMortality-March2018%20FINAL.pdf |archive-date=2018-09-25 |access-date=2018-05-13 |website=Duke University's Samuel DuBois Cook Center on Social Equity and Insight Center for Community Economic Development |vauthors=Smith IZ, Bentley-Edwards KL, El-Amin S, Darity W}}</ref> such as institutional racism, mass incarceration, poverty, and health care disparities that are present amongst the African American population. Following this theory, if institutional inequalities are addressed and repaired by the United States Government, this will reduce daily stressors for African Americans, and African American women in particular, and lessen the risk of complications in pregnancy and infant mortality. Others argue that increasing [[Diversity (politics)|diversity]] in the health care industry can help reduce the IMR as more representation can tackle deep-rooted racial biases and stereotypes that exist towards African American women.<ref>{{Cite book |url=https://archive.org/details/blackmaninwhitec0000twee |title=Black Man in a White Coat: A Doctor's Reflections on Race and Medicine |vauthors=Tweedy D |publisher=Picador |year=2015 |isbn=978-1-250-04463-1 |location=New York |url-access=registration}}</ref> Another attempt to reduce high IMR among black children is the use of [[doula]]s throughout pregnancy.<ref name="Chalhoub" />